1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Budweiser - Anheuser-Busch

Not Rated.
BudweiserBudweiser

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
57
awful

5,095 Ratings
THE BROS
80
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 5,095
Reviews: 1,483
rAvg: 2.35
pDev: 33.62%
Wants: 37
Gots: 583 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Anheuser-Busch visit their website
Missouri, United States

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
Brewed using a blend of imported and classic American aroma hops, and a blend of barley malts and rice. Budweiser is brewed with time-honored methods including “kraeusening” for natural carbonation and Beechwood aging, which results in unparalleled balance and character.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 11-21-2000)
View: Beers (77) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Budweiser Alström Bros
Ratings: 5,095 | Reviews: 1,483 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of Goliath
2.63/5  rDev +11.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

This beer pours a pale golden/yellow color and came to me with no head. However, I know it has a thin white head.

The aroma is weak. Some sweet malt character but not much else.

Taste follows suit. There is a little sweet malt, more than other American macros. There's also a little floral hop.

Mouthfeel is medium bodied with plenty of carbonation.

Drinkability is moderate. It's a sessionable beer, but I'm not encouraged to drink many due to it's lack of flavor.

Photo of CualityC
3.83/5  rDev +63%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 5

Is there anything new to bring to this discussion? Are rhetorical questions a pour (pun definitely not intended) way of starting a review? Yes, I hope.

At one point in my life I sold the Anheuser-Busch line of products, and I remember a sales meeting where our esteemed owner/boss proudly boasted that AB brewed the finest American macro-lager...

True.

But what does that really mean? Do I have to like it or agree with it because it's the best of a style? Sure, Budweiser is almost certainly the best American Macro, but can't I disagree with the entire "tradition"?

Overall, from marketing through flavor, this beer "style" seems to b be a refusal to accept beer as an artisanal product, brewed with care for people with a discerning palate. Instead Budweiser is a nearly flavorless concoction involving malts and fermentation, that is refreshing, and absolutely boring. Shouldn't I just drink water, I don't need to be drunk that bad.

To place this in perspective, some people say that people should accept any cultural tradition and not pass judgement on it. However, I hold that it is possible to condemn reprehensible traditions no matter who purports it. Budweiser is one such tradition.

Photo of Kemmerlin
1.33/5  rDev -43.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

Back in college I remember this beer being the king of beers and thought it was pretty good so I had some hope it would still be good. Unfortunately I was wrong. I almost puked after my first sip.

A: Straw yellow with no head but I have seen it with decent sticky head when poured hard.

S: Smelled light and faint of cheap malts and no hops kinda reminded me of a bathroom.

T: It actually tasted like it smelled and that was of pee. And the taste after the first sip would not leave my mouth. It was also sour almost like it was skunked but I doubt it was.

M/D: Watery feel with high carbonation like a soda. Not drinkable and should not be drank if you know what is good for you. Definitely good for beer pong though.

Photo of bgramer
1.35/5  rDev -42.6%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

How can I write about this beer without coming across as a beer snob?

I don't hate Budweiser, but with it's general availability, I'd drink it only as a last resort. We've all had it, it's impossible to avoid its marketing prowess.

It's very light in color which shows how water-ey it can be. There isn't much of an aroma to this beer, nor taste... just watery in your mouth with high carbonation.

Would I recommend it? No. Would I drink it? Only as an absolute last resort if nothing else is available where I am, such as a sporting event. Beer is better than no beer.

Photo of jpinkard
1.23/5  rDev -47.7%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

Well, I don't think they can really call this beer considering all the preservatives and the rice in it but...here it goes

Appearence: Very light in color, almost see through, maybe water with a little yellow dye in it. Quite a bit of head actually

Smell: Not much of a smell, hard to describe skunky but dry if that makes sense

Taste: Well, not much of a taste, very watery, sits in your mouth for a while but your not sure if you want it there

Mouthfeel: Very watery, highly carbonated in cans.

Drinkablility: A last resort beer, like if you go to an afterparty and they have a 30 pack in the fridge you might have to drink one against your will...we've all been there

Photo of largadeer
3/5  rDev +27.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Appearance - Very pale gold, crystal clear. The fizzy head falls flat pretty quickly.

Smell - Grainy, sweet, very mild. Difficult to pick out any distinct aromas.

Taste/mouthfeel - Mild grainy sweetness, doughy bread and a hint of vanilla. Absolutely no balancing bitterness. High carbonation, light-bodied, almost watery. Very clean finish with no aftertaste to speak of.

Notes - Not as bad as it's made out to be around here. Decidedly average, but not awful. While I'd never go out of my way to drink this, it's really not a bad brew.

Photo of donteatpoop
2.6/5  rDev +10.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Their logo is pretty awesome. I guess if you're going to pee in a bottle and try to market it, you had better have some pretty eye-catching packaging. These guys have great business sense. Why waste time perfecting the taste when the bulk of the American public will swallow pretty much anything they can afford? I used to drink this when I was underage because I didn't know what I was doing other than acquiring something that would get me drunk.

Photo of herefordjeep
3.95/5  rDev +68.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 5

For what this beer is, a consistent staple in the American pilsner-style lager category, Anheuser-Busch has hit a bulls eye. Pours straw-yellow with exceptionally uniform and persistent lacing. Upon smell, a sour, almost always somewhat skunked version of hoppiness hits your nose, but once past, a great, clean scent of crisp pilsner can be found. Upon tasting, intense carbonation, moderate maltiness and mouthfeel can be noticed. Hoppiness is medium, and on the moderate sector in terms of spiciness. Finish is clean, with a moderate after-feel of malt syrup and carbonation. For a traditional American, mass produced pilsner-style brew, a cold Budweiser simply cannot be beat. Drinkability is exceptional, and is best in the spring and summer. A.

Photo of Hoagie1973
3.38/5  rDev +43.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Alright people let's set the record straight here. This beer is NOT THAT BAD! I could never understand why people will bash this beer, then sit there and suck down some swill like Corona or Yuengling.
No, it's not great, but its a decent example of the style.
It's clean and crisp (like advertised), though pretty unbalanced, way to the malty side. For a beer that brags six different varieties of hops, you can barely find any on the palette, even when searching for them.
Mouthfeel is not great, what with the enormous bubbles of carbonation.
But the fact of the matter is that Bud is clean, refreshing, inoffensive, and affordable. Hey, it is what it is, but someone out there must agree with me since it's still by far and away the best selling beer in America and #2 in the world.
That being said, I think I'll go to my fridge now and grab a Sam Adams.

Photo of zeff80
2.18/5  rDev -7.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75

Had some at a recent gathering and figured it is time to review it.

A - Poured out a clear, yellow color with a good deal of carbonation and a small, fizzy white head. No lacing.

S - It smelled of grain adjuncts and slightly metallic...even though I poured it into a pint glass.

T - It tasted of corn and some faint malt. It was bitter, but not a good hoppy bitter...a bad bitter.

M - It was crisp and sharp. A light-bodied beer.

D - This was a good reminder of why I don't usually drink this. I remember in years past (i.e. college days) it usually gave me headaches in the morning and not because of overcomsumption.

Photo of BoitSansSoif
2.53/5  rDev +7.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A-Clear, golden straw. The thick head faded quickly into nothing and left no trace.

S-Faint malt, overcooked rice, trace of hops, and doughy biscuit. There was also a hint of light unidentifiable fruit, sweet honey, and lingering wet dog. I'm not so sure this was stored properly, and since it's on tap, I don't know how old it is.

T-Ricey malt w/hint of hops. The aftertaste was a little skunky. I'm not a big fan of the so-called King of Beers, but this is honestly the worse one I remember having in a long while, and it's not usually this bad. Finish was not as clean as usual.

M-The savior of this glass, the heavy carbonation, hid some of the apparent lack of freshness. Usually I would think the carbonation was a bit much, but this time it was a boon.

D-Got better with each sip as the palate adjusted itself to gradually lower standards.

Photo of hardy008
2.35/5  rDev 0%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Appearance - Pale yellow with an average foamy head which disappeared quickly.
Smell - Rice, grains, not much else.
Taste - Rice and grains. not impressive, but not the worst massed produced beer I have had.
Mouthfeel - decent, light bodied, not bad for mass produced.
Drinkability - Not my favorite, but not the worst either.

Photo of avalon07
1.18/5  rDev -49.8%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

I was at a party recently and all they had was Bud. Didn't want to be rude, so I had one for the first time in a long time. Unlike in previous years, I had a chance to examine this inexplicably popular beer.

It has a light, golden color, with a translucent texture. Little to no head on the pour.

Kind of nasty smell; hard to describe. Some malts, but little else. Very weak.

The malt was the only thing I really tasted. Other than that, it was a watery mess.

Very little carbonation, therefore, a typically unexciting mouthfeel.

I agree with the Bros. that this is a mass-produced beer designed to please everyone who doesn't seem to care what their beer tastes like. Nevertheless, this doesn't excuse Budweiser for putting out a lame beer. It's not drinkable at all. I'd rather drink glass after glass of tap water. I'd probably get drunker off the mercury and chromium than I would with a case of Budweiser.

Photo of BeerTaster
3.05/5  rDev +29.8%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

What can I say had a can over at my uncle's house poured into a pilsner glass crystle cleer pale yellow color. The apearence was very good but the head disapeared to quick so it lost points for that. Smell not much here fant hop aroma maby green apple and grain. Taste very clean not much else no after taste. Mouthfeel a bit thin high in carbonation. Drinkability is ok you dont even know your dinking anything.

Photo of nrpellegrini
3.6/5  rDev +53.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A: Clear golden color. Nice thick white head, stays for a decent time
S: Like real beer, corn, malts
T: Full, great solid crisp flavor, beerrrr.
M: Crisp, smooth, slight carbonation tingle
D: Very good, so easy to keep drinking and drinking

Best location I've had this beer: San Diego, California

Photo of Matty1918
2.45/5  rDev +4.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

The King Of Beers...

If I have to drink swill I'll usually grab Bud or Miller High Life..(Although when I go to my favorite food dive a Pabst on tap is always good too).

What can I say, this beer is exactly what you pay for. Little taste, not much color...a good swilling beer.

Photo of JDV
2.65/5  rDev +12.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Very light, pale-ish yellow with no head at all. Some sweet simple malt smell. Too highly carbonated on first taste. Just the mildest bit of bitterness, with malty, corn, rice-ish sweetness following in the aftertaste. Quite sweet actually, but the intense carbonation kind of strips the tongue making it hard to taste it after a while. A bit harsh on the palate. Not a great beer, obviously, but the worst part was the unusual headachy buzz this gave me. Would rather drink just about anything else.

Photo of imaguitargod
1.02/5  rDev -56.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

This is the only beer (besides a lambic due to a sulfite allergy) that I will actually turn down even if it's offered to me for free. It's named King of Beers because most people haven't had anything other than PBR, Miller or Miller and are fooled into thinking beer should taste like this.

Unusually large head with an odor that matches the smell that their brewery produces (it smells slightly like urine and believe me, I know. I used to live close to their Los Angeles Brewery and when you drive by there, your windows better be rolled up). The taste is overly tingly because of the high carbonation and has a large amount of corn flavor. The aftertaste is not at all pleasant.

Photo of Monkeypaws
1.73/5  rDev -26.4%
look: 2 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

BUUUURRRRPPP!

Slightly yellow gaseous water. THIS is the taste of success?

Seriously, it is very pale and has very little flavor, hence the words AB uses to market it "Clean, crisp, refreshing ..." Sounds like a freshly laundered shirt more than a beer.

Photo of baseballrock
3.75/5  rDev +59.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 4.5

The great american industrial beer. My favorite of all the major brewing company beers. Smooth and clean tasting beer. Watery compared to a mirco, but it has more taste than in other macro. Great on a hot day, out with your freinds, or at the ball game. can't complain that it is weak or anything, its not suposed to be a micro.

Photo of deltatauhobbit
2.5/5  rDev +6.4%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Oh the King of Beers...

Pours a clear yellow color, no head, fizzy.

One thing about Budweiser is that it is consistent and is always drinkable (in the way that you can have many and never overload your taste buds).

They say it's tasteless, that's reserved for Bud Light, while this beer does have a crisp, smooth taste with loads of carbonation.

Photo of cbleary
2.58/5  rDev +9.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Enjoyed out of a 12 oz. can into a pint glass.

Budweiser is an interesting beer. Its a consistent beer with a clean smell and crisp taste but there us something slippery about the mouthfeel and it doesn't sit well at all in my stomach. Its like there is an strange ingredient that is only in Bud that I can't put my finger on. I can see why it is a popular beer, but it isn't for me.

Photo of BradLikesBrew
3.38/5  rDev +43.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

American Macro Lager Review #1: Budweiser.

Born on November 16, 2007. Say what you will about AB, born on dating is something every brewery needs to embrace.

a: Crystal clear straw colored body. A thick and frothy head quickly settles to a thin ring of white bubbles hugging the edge of my SA glass. Lacing is minimal. Head retention is non-existent.

s: Aroma is mild. Faint malt, rice, and a subtle green apple note.

t: Malt, rice, green apples and a dash of hops. A boringly simple concoction, as it was meant to be. Unlike other Macro Lagers, Budweiser doesn't display any unpleasant flavors. The flavor may be weak, but it isn't gross. Sadly, with this style, that is an accomplishment.

m: Effervescent carbonation and a clean finish. Like many of its peers, Bud seems to be way over carbonated to me. Not it the way it pours or looks, just in the way it feels on the tongue. Seems like there are so many bubbles, it makes it hard to taste. Maybe that's the idea?

d: To use an already overused cliche, it is what it is. Budweiser is brewed to be clean, crisp and refreshing and it excels at all three. Easy to see why it sells so well.

I also can't help but respect its consistency. Every Budweiser I have consumed tasted exactly the same. I've done enough homebrewing to have a great deal of respect for this.

It may not be what I reach for when I want a beer, but Bud isn't brewed for me, its brewed for the average beer drinking public (not BAs) and with this demographic, it seems to be right on. As far as the mass produced American lagers go, I think this is the best, but my goal is to review them all before I make my final judgment.

Photo of Surefire
1.85/5  rDev -21.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 2.5

A: No faults in appearance.

S: Bland, smells like beer flavored water.

T: Tastes like beer flavored water, or a beer flavored tea. Not much going on, very watery.

M: Waterly, almost zero body.

D: Drinkable, but not enjoyable.

Overall: Bud tastes like beer flavored water, but on the positive side its consistent enough that it doesn't have any glaring flaws from batch to batch. Bud is drinkable if it is the only beer available, but its NOT a good or even average beer. I'd rather pay slightly more for its big brother, Michelob... which at least has some body and flavor to it. I don't see a reason to buy Bud when Michelob (also made by A-B) is only slightly more expensive.

Photo of Constellation
3.05/5  rDev +29.8%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Chances are, if somebody rebottled a Bud and slapped a fancy label on it, most beer aficionados would find it a slightly above average lager with good drinkability and a notable cleaness on the palatte. But this is a beer aficionado forum, where many patrons are overzealous in their desire to look down on the mass produced beers those beer drinkers who do not know as much as them take refuge in. Thus, the underwhelming reviews on this site.

A: We all know what a Budweiser looks like.
S: Mostly cigarette smoke, but that is probably because the last one I has was in a bar.
T: The first one is okay. The tenth one is awesome. (Isn't that why we drink Bud?)
M: Clean, crisp, and refreshing.
D: The bourgeois seems to think pretty good. I agree.

Budweiser from Anheuser-Busch
57 out of 100 based on 5,095 ratings.